Film During The Cold War

The parallels between the theme of the film and rising fears of communism and related topics of concern during that time are captivating. Communism was an ideology originating in the Soviet Union with the ideas of establishing a

A great change came during WW1 and WW2. War images were not the only way war was portrayed, but motion pictures also came along. The motion pictures gave a whole new perspective on war to the American people. Thus, by seeing this influence, many powerful leaders saw an advantage. They saw, “the tremendous potential of movies for propaganda and

Furthermore, Americans placed trust in the presence of pictures, for they could “see it happen.” Because it was a visual medium, television depicted the raw horror of war and primarily focused on the negative. In addition, media recognized the potential for television to exploit the war’s sensationalism and to capture the minds of their viewers. The Tet Offensive was noted by many intellectuals

As I have stated before, the main subject of this movie is the Cold War. I did have previous knowledge of this subject such as it

Since the late 1940s, American cinema has been obsessed with the idea of the atomic bomb and what it stands for; whether that be destruction or absolute power depends on the film. This symbolism would then come to define the 1950s, and later on American cinema as well. This symbolism then must be addressed from the lenses of, both, history and socio-political commentary. Then the question must be posed why specifically these two lenses? The answer to this question, then, lies in the films of the 50s, and beyond. Whether this answer lies in the apocalyptic imagination present in the films or the politics of the time, McCarthyism would influence American culture far beyond the 50s, depends on the historian who is asked. The answer, then,

At this time both the democratic United States and the communist Soviet Union believed that successful advancements in technology would enable them to assert strength and superiority. According to Achieve 3000, “Case Against Rosenberg Falls Apart,” “In 1949, The Soviet Union test-launched an atomic bomb, an act that raised suspicions within the U.S. government” (1). Also, the thought of the Soviet Union having the ability to relinquish such a devastating weapon on the United States frightened the people of America as well. When the Cold War developed in the late 1040s the U.S. government again feared that the communist revolution in the Soviet Union would influence many people in the U.S. to do the same. According to the text,”The fear of communism even spread towards Hollywood when a congressional group called the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) investigated communist influence in the entertainment industry, issuing subpoenas to writers, actors, directors, and studio executives and asking them, ‘Are you or have you ever been a member of the Communist party’”(1).

Even after war, groups will always produce media with the intent of influencing the public. “Meet King Joe,” for example, is a post World War II film that follows Joe on an educational journey where he learns about how the American economy works to make his life better. The other post World War II film to be analyzed, “Don’t Be a Sucker,” follows Mike as a wise stranger tells him about how, as Americans, we should all be tolerant of each others differences lest we become like Nazi Germany. Both of these films utilize Plain Folks appeals and other techniques in an effort to influence public opinion; but one is black, deceptive, and unethical propaganda while the other may be closer to a rational attempt at persuasion than a piece of propaganda.

Soviet Montage is a movement driven by “Marxist [politics]” and an “economic philosophy” developed in Soviet Russia at the time of revolution. Lenin himself considered film, as an art form as the “most influential of all arts” as it not only entertained but could be used to “[mould] and reinforce values.”( Mast, G. & Kawin, B. F.) Sergei Eisenstein, himself a Marxist, is no exception to this and not only are his films are full of political propaganda, but he is also considered “the greatest master of montage.” .”( Mast, G. & Kawin, B. F.) His film October, called Ten Days That Shook The World in the Western world at the time and butchered due to its content, has always been considered problematic for audiences and critics alike and the standard critique of the film soon became “The Film as a whole is difficult and incoherent.” (Sperbur) Although if analysed properly, you can see that it has powerful political and social messages to convey and comprises of film form that Eisenstein himself called “intellectual film.”

How did the Paramount decision of 1948 change the U.S. film industry? To what degree did the decision alter the way the industry did business?

Propaganda played a major role in the Cold War. In a 1947 comic book, the idea of the future was depicted as, “Communists infiltrate nearly every aspect of America, including subverting the Speaker of the House, before assassinating both the President and Vice-President...” (Document 7 caption) while showing chaos and crisis under communist rule. The cover of the book shows a frantic disarray of people screaming and a burning American flag, implying the damage Soviet Union will bring. The comic book sent a message to Americans that communism will bring horror, murder, and utter chaos to the US if allowed to spread and take over

Before analysing individual science-fiction films from the 1950s, it is important to gain a clear understanding of the social, cultural and political background against which these films were set. Paranoia is a term frequently used to describe an acute, anxiety dominated medical condition (Paranoia, 2009), however in the context of 1950’s America, this term can be used more accurately to describe the general, delusionary mood of the nation. The first important event that influenced a paranoiac filmmaking atmosphere was the Cold War. As opposed to the ‘hot war’ (WWII) that involved active military hostilities, the Cold War was based on heightened tension and suspicions between Western Bloc (USA) powers and Eastern Bloc (Soviet Union) powers (The

During the Cold War, the Soviets were trying to spread communism throughout Europe and Asia by exalting its achievements, and undermining democracy. Part of their approach was by launching ‘Hate-America’ propaganda. “As the Cold War intensified, the Truman administration launched an aggressive “Campaign of Truth” […] to counter the Soviet Union propaganda machine (Ubah, 2012).” The Campaign of Truth was created to help convince the world that the United States has “no purpose of going to war, except in the defense of freedom. (Vaccaro, 1950)” Truman encouraged the media to show the world that the United States was ‘wholly dedicated to the cause of peace (Vaccaro,

As already mentioned, the United States readily took part in the propaganda parley of World War II. The threat of subversive Nazi propaganda on U.S. soil caused private citizens to use their contacts to pressure the government into counteracting the “attack on democracy” (Laurie 30-32). This spurred the creation of government organizations such as the U.S. Office of the Coordinator of Information (COI) and the U.S. Office of Strategic Services (OSS). The role of these organizations was to oversee the propaganda released on behalf of the government (Laurie 45). The military naturally became involved in the creation and implementation of propaganda films to promote anti-Nazi feelings across a nation immersed in a global war. Also, the hope was that these films would act as a morale booster necessary in a nation that had just experienced the horrors of Pearl Harbor (Fyne 12).

In “Battleship Potemkin,” released in 1925, opposition and comparison were used to idealize Russia as well. Any film that was not propaganda was seen to be against Soviet Russia. Montage was used to effectively transmit a certain political

Sergei Eisenstein and Dziga Vertov are among the most identifiable names in early Soviet film. Their contributions to film, in the areas of montage and documentary film respectively, have helped to structure film, as we know it today. However, apart from their theoretical contributions to the field, both directors played an imperative role in Soviet film during the 1920s and 1930s. This paper examines historical revisionism within their film, how their theories of montage influenced the revisionism, and how they were persistent in the use montage throughout their careers as filmmakers to assert themselves as artists.